Losing 1 lb or more in 24 hours
Replies
-
What kind of monster are you?
The guy's a sociopath. Don't let the striped shirt and the lawn chair fool you.0 -
:bigsmile: someone finally said it....thanks for the future link0
-
I am weighing in once a month for this reason.0
-
I'm liking how level headed you are about this. Add me!0
-
So what did you actually tell her? I'm confused.0
-
I can weigh the same from one morning to the the next being on program, and lose weight when I've had a large meal the day before. It never makes absolute sense so I stopped trying to figure it out
0 -
That's exactly why I try not to get on the scale every day. Normal fluctuations make me second guess silly stuff.0
-
And this is why tape-measure measurements, body fat % readings (not done by a scale), and how one's clothes fit are a much more reliable source of progress than the scale.0
-
"To add to that, there is approximately 3500 calories in 1 pound of fat. If you were to lose that 1 pound of fat in 24 hours, you would have to burn at least 7000 calories MORE than what you ate. For the average person, that would be more than 10 hours of moderately hard exercise... If you think you lost a pound of fat, think again... "
Just wondering why I would have to burn 7000 more than I eat to lose one pound. That does not make sense to me.0 -
Even tho i know this to be true, its nice having it written down. There are a lot of ignorant misinformed people out there. SPREAD THE WORD!0
-
"To add to that, there is approximately 3500 calories in 1 pound of fat. If you were to lose that 1 pound of fat in 24 hours, you would have to burn at least 7000 calories MORE than what you ate. For the average person, that would be more than 10 hours of moderately hard exercise... If you think you lost a pound of fat, think again... "
Just wondering why I would have to burn 7000 more than I eat to lose one pound. That does not make sense to me.
It's from what I said earlier in the post: When you workout, at most, 50% of the calories you burn are from fat. 50% of 7000 is 3500, which = 1 lb of fat.0 -
I LIKE THIS POST!!!0
-
Most of this I already knew....or partly knew, but it was all great information. Thanks for sharing this!0
-
I do... I weigh before a hard bike ride and after to make sure that I am drinking enough. Even with as much as I do take in while riding, I still am normally a pound or two low in water that I need to make up.
That said, the only weigh in I count is the one on Monday Morning.0 -
Thank you for this post! My feed is littered with people panicking because they weigh themselves every day, or even multiple times a day, and they go on this melt down of how could they have possibly gained weight, etc. etc. So, once again, thank you.0
-
"To add to that, there is approximately 3500 calories in 1 pound of fat. If you were to lose that 1 pound of fat in 24 hours, you would have to burn at least 7000 calories MORE than what you ate. For the average person, that would be more than 10 hours of moderately hard exercise... If you think you lost a pound of fat, think again... "
Just wondering why I would have to burn 7000 more than I eat to lose one pound. That does not make sense to me.
It's from what I said earlier in the post: When you workout, at most, 50% of the calories you burn are from fat. 50% of 7000 is 3500, which = 1 lb of fat.
I don't believe MFP agrees with you on this part. They assign a burn of 3,500 per week over what a person has eaten to equal loss of one pound. I am not a nutritionist or other expert, but everything I have read supports this...including personal experience. That being said, the rest of your post is spot-on. I even put on muscle fast (especially for a girl) but 1 pound in a day...absolutely no way. Now if steroids are thrown in there...idk...no experience there.0 -
i love this post. Hate seeing people like OMG I WENT OVER MY CALS BY 200 AND NOW IM LIKE 2LB HEAVIER THAN THIS MORNING!
Glad you're getting this out there!0 -
"To add to that, there is approximately 3500 calories in 1 pound of fat. If you were to lose that 1 pound of fat in 24 hours, you would have to burn at least 7000 calories MORE than what you ate. For the average person, that would be more than 10 hours of moderately hard exercise... If you think you lost a pound of fat, think again... "
Just wondering why I would have to burn 7000 more than I eat to lose one pound. That does not make sense to me.
It's from what I said earlier in the post: When you workout, at most, 50% of the calories you burn are from fat. 50% of 7000 is 3500, which = 1 lb of fat.
I don't believe MFP agrees with you on this part. They assign a burn of 3,500 per week over what a person has eaten to equal loss of one pound. I am not a nutritionist or other expert, but everything I have read supports this...including personal experience. That being said, the rest of your post is spot-on. I even put on muscle fast (especially for a girl) but 1 pound in a day...absolutely no way. Now if steroids are thrown in there...idk...no experience there.
I will agree with this for one reason - they tell you have a deficit of 3500 calories *over a period of 1 week.* How your body processes calroies over an extended period of time is very different from how it reacts when it needs extra calories right away. If you burned off those extra 3500 calories in 12 hours, as opposed to 7 days, you would not lose a pound of fat. It would burn off your glycogen stores first, then it will start eating away your muscles before it started to eat away your fat.
If it is a long, slow burn, over a week or longer, then your body will have time to digest the calories slower, and then it will target fat first, because it knows it needs the muscles to function properly. There's no immediate need for the calories, so it can take it's time at breaking down the cells into usable energy.0 -
Hmm...What happens if there is not enough glycogen stored? I am thinking "Biggest Loser" type setting...low calorie intake and high levels of activity. With the low calorie intake, the glycogen stores cannot be adequately replenished, right? See, if my high school/college biology classes would have gotten into this stuff...maybe, just maybe, I'd have been more interested in the sciences...but I digress."To add to that, there is approximately 3500 calories in 1 pound of fat. If you were to lose that 1 pound of fat in 24 hours, you would have to burn at least 7000 calories MORE than what you ate. For the average person, that would be more than 10 hours of moderately hard exercise... If you think you lost a pound of fat, think again... "
Just wondering why I would have to burn 7000 more than I eat to lose one pound. That does not make sense to me.
It's from what I said earlier in the post: When you workout, at most, 50% of the calories you burn are from fat. 50% of 7000 is 3500, which = 1 lb of fat.
I don't believe MFP agrees with you on this part. They assign a burn of 3,500 per week over what a person has eaten to equal loss of one pound. I am not a nutritionist or other expert, but everything I have read supports this...including personal experience. That being said, the rest of your post is spot-on. I even put on muscle fast (especially for a girl) but 1 pound in a day...absolutely no way. Now if steroids are thrown in there...idk...no experience there.
I will agree with this for one reason - they tell you have a deficit of 3500 calories *over a period of 1 week.* How your body processes calroies over an extended period of time is very different from how it reacts when it needs extra calories right away. If you burned off those extra 3500 calories in 12 hours, as opposed to 7 days, you would not lose a pound of fat. It would burn off your glycogen stores first, then it will start eating away your muscles before it started to eat away your fat.
If it is a long, slow burn, over a week or longer, then your body will have time to digest the calories slower, and then it will target fat first, because it knows it needs the muscles to function properly. There's no immediate need for the calories, so it can take it's time at breaking down the cells into usable energy.0 -
Hmm...What happens if there is not enough glycogen stored? I am thinking "Biggest Loser" type setting...low calorie intake and high levels of activity. With the low calorie intake, the glycogen stores cannot be adequately replenished, right? See, if my high school/college biology classes would have gotten into this stuff...maybe, just maybe, I'd have been more interested in the sciences...but I digress."To add to that, there is approximately 3500 calories in 1 pound of fat. If you were to lose that 1 pound of fat in 24 hours, you would have to burn at least 7000 calories MORE than what you ate. For the average person, that would be more than 10 hours of moderately hard exercise... If you think you lost a pound of fat, think again... "
Just wondering why I would have to burn 7000 more than I eat to lose one pound. That does not make sense to me.
It's from what I said earlier in the post: When you workout, at most, 50% of the calories you burn are from fat. 50% of 7000 is 3500, which = 1 lb of fat.
I don't believe MFP agrees with you on this part. They assign a burn of 3,500 per week over what a person has eaten to equal loss of one pound. I am not a nutritionist or other expert, but everything I have read supports this...including personal experience. That being said, the rest of your post is spot-on. I even put on muscle fast (especially for a girl) but 1 pound in a day...absolutely no way. Now if steroids are thrown in there...idk...no experience there.
I will agree with this for one reason - they tell you have a deficit of 3500 calories *over a period of 1 week.* How your body processes calroies over an extended period of time is very different from how it reacts when it needs extra calories right away. If you burned off those extra 3500 calories in 12 hours, as opposed to 7 days, you would not lose a pound of fat. It would burn off your glycogen stores first, then it will start eating away your muscles before it started to eat away your fat.
If it is a long, slow burn, over a week or longer, then your body will have time to digest the calories slower, and then it will target fat first, because it knows it needs the muscles to function properly. There's no immediate need for the calories, so it can take it's time at breaking down the cells into usable energy.
I can't say anything with regards to the "biggest loser" scenarios, but those are very extreme circumstances. It is easier to lose weight when you're heavier. I don't know the reasons why, because I haven't researched any of that before (becuase I've never weighed more than 240 lbs). It simply hasn't been of importance to me. Feel free to look it up and post the answer on here, if you can find it.0 -
very true advice, i only weigh once a week when dieting and monthly (or less) when i'm not as i know i fluctuate day to day and a pound up or down one day to the next is nothing to panic about 0
-
This is pretty awesome. Just saying.0
-
Great post! I weigh myself daily but only record it once a week. I do daily to keep myself on track and accountable for what goes into my body. For what ever mental reason, this works for me.0
-
Now, I just checked out the numbers, and found that 1 pound of water is 500 mL (or 0.264 Gallons, for you American folks). That's a mere 2 cups. Less than 2 glasses.
Just for clarification on this (I'm not contesting the figures BTW)
500ml of water will weigh 500g (1.1lb)0 -
Great post. I think I knew most of the facts presented...just hadn't tied them all together. I like it when other people do that for me. HAHA.
So, I'm just starting back into weight loss mode after hitting the 240lb mark. However, a few years ago, I was at this same 240lb mark and I joined a weight watchers class for 10 weeks in an effort to get down to 190 so that I could get into officer training school (OTS). During those 10 weeks I did follow the point system pretty successfully and I did include 1hr aerobic classes (~3days/week). I also weighed myself daily (every morning). In general I saw 2lbs of loss every 3days (in the beginning) and then by the 5th or 6th week I was down to 1lb every 2days. Now I wasn't doing anything crazy with my exercise and hit my points pretty much every day.
So my question is, does OP's discussion explain this experience? It seems the OP's discussion (which is perfectly logical and I would subscribe to it) discredits the ability to loose weght on the order of 5 lbs/week. What am I lacking?
Since I hope to reattack this weight loss challange and stick to it as I did a few years ago, I'll share my current info. I'm a 31yr old male. 235 lbs (as of this morning). Office worker. Beer drinker. TV watcher.
See you guys around...
Gary0 -
This is pretty awesome. Just saying.
^ THIS!! Great post, thanks for sharing0 -
Thanks for posting very informative...t0
-
Great information!! Thanks0
-
Ive been on MFP for 115 days and this post has just explained so much for me!
Thank you for posting!0 -
Great post, well explained. More people should take it into consideration!0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 430 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions